(1) I spend a lot of time with my hand in the air trying to get them to come to me. There were a ton of things I wanted to say, but didn't get the chance. In particular I was really angered by the people suggesting evidence for God exists in the sense of wonder we feel at the beauty of a landscape, etc. Well firstly if God made those then God also made the sense of revulsion we feel at maggots or faeces. Secondly there are clear, easy to identify, evolutionary benefits to having a good feeling when you are able to survey a large area of territory and identify food sources, potential dangers, enemies and fresh water sources. Doh! But thirdly and more to the point, if a great feeling makes you believe in God, why does orgasm not do it? Most people I know would gladly trade a bit of scenery for great sex...
(2) Even before the show goes out there appears to be "scandal" on Twitter over the notion that I compare the Qu'ran to Harry Potter. That is taking things a little out of context. A Muslim guy said that the Bible had discrepancies in it but that the Qu'ran doesn't contradict itself so it must be true. Now there were plenty of experts on hand to point out there are numerous discrepancies in the Qu'ran. My point is that a lack of discrepancies doesn't make something true. Neither Harry Potter nor Lord of the Rings contradicts itself, so are they true too?
That's my point (as you'll see tomorrow 10am BBC One). For the record I would never be so rude as to compare Harry Potter to the Qu'ran - after all Harry Potter is an entertaining read with only mild overtones of sexism*!
*Footnote: Hermione is the smart one. Why is she not the hero?
7 comments:
It does make you wonder if, for example 150 years from now, the texts of JRR Tolkien are "rediscovered" and become the basis for some insane cult.
Look at what happened with the legend of King Arthur. Monks took the story and embellished and there is this sub-culture of modern "druids" that have based their ideas around parts of it.
Isn't Hermione the hero? There was a poll a little while ago that showed she is a more popular character than Harry. (Okay, I guess I might be drifting a bit off-topic there...)
The reason why the Qu'ran is internally more consistent than the Bible is that Caliph Uthman in the 7th century compiled a version he liked and had all the others burnt (as recorded in Sahih Bukhari). The early Christians weren't in charge of anything much so didn't have the power to do this sort of thing.
The pro God side in the main had monetary gain or social status as motivation so I recognise they are biased.
In response to your postscript, this lovely essay by Sady Doyle, "In Praise of Joanne Rowling's Hermoine Granger Series":
http://globalcomment.com/2011/in-praise-of-hermione-granger-series/
Enjoy!
Years ago when I worked in finance we referred to it as "Hermione Grainer syndrome", the phenomenon of when a woman says something smart in a meeting and no-one acknowledges it then two minutes later a guy says the same thing and everyone goes "brilliant!!".
Sorry for the late addition, but on the subject of Harry Potter I thought that part of what the book is trying to show is that being a hero isn't necessarily based on, and doesn't automatically entail, 'heroic' behaviour or attributes. There might have been people who were better suited to the role of saviour than Harry, but he was stuck with it and the series charts how he grows into it.
The fact that he's not as smart, or as powerful, or as well-connected as the people round him just shows that fate/destiny/prophecy/whatever has dealt him a rough hand and he's doing the best he can because he may not be the most obvious choice for the role of hero, but that doesn't stop him from trying. That Hermione is a better choice to be the hero just underlines the fact that Harry received the role through the vagaries of fate, or possibly the actions of his mother, rather than through any agency on his part.
Post a Comment